Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 09 Hansard (Tuesday, 17 August 2004) . . Page.. 3684 ..

could use only 300 or 400 grams. The way that has been set out is also to be welcomed, and assists in ensuring that expensive and scarce resources for analysing purity are not wasted.

I also like the provisions whereby the prosecution will be allowed to prove the quantity of the drug involved in an alleged offence—for example, a large commercial quantity—by aggregating the amount of drugs trafficked over repeated transactions and aggregating different kinds of drugs involved on one occasion. That is to enable the infliction of severe penalties on those who deal in bulk by an accumulation of small-scale dealing. So, a number of welcome additions in this bill target the most serious of offenders.

I hope that the courts listen to what is being said in relation to this bill. This is aimed at the top of the scale, the very serious operators. There are some very significant penalties for good reason. The community would expect significant penalties to be imposed on those who are found guilty of these most heinous offences. In a recent case, following a good police operation, three people were charged with importing drugs into the territory, and only one did some time in jail. That is not what the community expects. The community expects significant penalties to be imposed on serious drug pushers, and that is exactly what this bill proposes. I am happy to put those comments on the record and hope that when courts consider this bill they take that into account.

The bill also takes into account concerns by police in relation to hydroponic manufacture of cannabis and the number of plants one can have. There was a big problem with our laws. They allowed someone to have five plants and still be subject to a simple cannabis offence notice—in other words, an infringement notice. Dropping that to two is much more realistic. We have no problem with that. It overcomes the legitimate concerns of the police and sends a message to a large number of people who think it is okay, legal, to have a reasonably small number of cannabis plants or to grow their own.

One of the main purposes behind my bill, which I will now speak to, is to bring home to people that it is not legal to smoke cannabis, even in small quantities. It is not legal to possess cannabis, even in small quantities. It is not legal to have one, two, three, or four plants and use them yourself. That is still illegal. The infringement notice system was simply a convenient way of ensuring people could be dealt with without having to go to court for possessing very small quantities. But the use of this drug—a very dangerous, damaging drug that has dreadful effects on people—is still illegal even in small quantities.

A lot of people in Canberra get confused about that, especially young people. If nothing else, I hope this debate reminds them that using any amount of cannabis is illegal. It is just that there is an infringement notice scheme for simple, minimal cannabis use. That is what my bill seeks to do. As a result of the Attorney’s bill, which came down after it, I seek to make a number of basic amendments. The first will ensure that my simple cannabis offence bill, the Drugs of Dependence Amendment Bill, commences on the same day as the Criminal Code (Serious Drug Offences) Amendment Bill. A couple of clauses will be now superfluous, so I will not be proceeding with them, specifically clause 4.

To qualify for the infringement notice scheme, one will now be able to have a maximum of two cannabis plants, so that needs to be amended. Rather than a maximum fine of

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .